D&D (2024) D&D Monster Manual (2025)

[el-remmen]

Every DM says that about every monster book. The monster design in your head is always better than the one that came from someone else.

That's because homebrew monster design is fun and low stakes. You can throw your latest concoction at players over and over without unduly unbalancing the game (most of the time anyway), unlike introducing, for example, a new subclass or even a new spell. Furthermore, any halfway decent DM will get better at it as they go along making them over the years learning from their "live" playtests.

 

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

Okay. I mean, everyone has their own thresholds, and that's fine. but I find it weird that someone could be disappointed by Flee Mortals and still expect MM2025 to be something they would like given the evidence of Monsters of the Multiverse. it is totally okay to not like what MCDM did, of course, but MMM certainly did not elevate WotC monster design in any appreciable way.

He said he plans on buying the MM revision for the art based on the previews. He is not really interested in more statblocks. He thinks its primary value is as an art book.

 

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

Every DM says that about every monster book. The monster design in your head is always better than the one that came from someone else.

Maybe, he has over 500+ monsters on this website so I feel he has a good idea of monster design.

 

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

sounds like he likes monsters a certain way, whether that is actually better or just personal preference is another matter.

Everyone likes the monsters they create best, no one intentionally creates ones they do not like

I think it was more about him wanting new ideas and not finding them in Flee Mortals.

 

[el-remmen]

Maybe, he has over 500+ monsters on this website so I feel he has a good idea of monster design.

Link?

 

[el-remmen]

I think it was more about him wanting new ideas and not finding them in Flee Mortals.

I feel similarly. I like the book for some specific things to steal, but I still haven't (and probably never will) run a monster straight out of that book.

 

[Zaukrie]

I like the lore from Flee Mortals! I like FM! more than the 5e monster manual. But I like A5E best.
FM! is a bit over-engineered. I compared the Ogre from 5e, a5e, and MCDM. A5e is best for me- cool mechanical stuff, but not too heavy.

And their monster entries are the most USEFUL for me when I'm in the middle of running a game- little charts of signs that there are ogres in the area, what ogres might be doing, same loot for encounters, names, etc.

You can use them all ofc- but when on the fly I go to grab a monster, and I look at an ogre for each, I end up using the a5e ones cuz they're the most useful (cooler than 5e) and don't have a ton of mechanical stuff to parse through (FM!).

I love the design in a5e with the signs and and the other stuff in there so much! I've tried to incorporate similar in at least one of my products.

 

[Henadic Theologian]

Looking forward to seeing what monsters they add to it.

 

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

interact with what? counterspell, or is there anything else?

I certainly prefer the MotM approach over the old one, never needed 20 spells in a stat block

Counterspell, dispel magic, the mage slayer feat, various features that give save bonuses vs spells.

It shouldn't be hard to write (evocation, lvl 3) after the name of the power in the stat block. No idea why people seem to think that the only options are to have non-spell powers or a list of 20 spells referencing the PHB.

 

[Sulicius]

The next Monster Manual is to me very interesting in many ways. First off: monsters are easiest to design and use.

Almost every fandom has had someone enthusiastically make stat blocks for a BBEG, or for 600+ Pokémon. There are also multitudes of 3rd party monster books. Kobold Press books are a great example. Lately we had Flee! Mortals! from MCDM and my favorite Forge of Foes. There are monsters for every preference. Do we need a new MM? Probably least of all and that is why it will be published next year.

But then again, I have found WotC monster design to be closest to what I enjoy running at the table. Both Fizban’s and Bigby’s have given me a lot of useful, effective monsters with great art. The monsters are streamlined to give enough flavor to be interesting, but not too complicated to randomly add to a combat without having to study the stat block.

I am 100% buying this MM, unless reviews are bad.

I’m seeing some discussion pop up again about spell-like abilities and their lack of interaction with Counterspell. I do agree that the abilities that work like spells, cast by an actual spellcaster, could have a spell level next to its name, like Flee! Mortals! does. I also think removing Counterspell from the next PHB would be great. I don’t want a reaction that cancels my monster turns.